Unions, Mich. lawmakers hold state back in global market

Yes, yes, yes! I totally agree on all counts! Local “leaders” and politicos can tout Michigan manufacturing and status quo all they want, and blame globalization and anti-unions and everything else. But the truth is that we are in a global economy now whether we like it or not. Michigan workers and companies need to be truly innovative and efficient to be competitive, and can no longer rely on the bailouts and old way of doing things that got them into this mess in the first place!

I, too, have wondered how if the economy is in such bad shape and people are losing houses, how these “workers” can strike. I’m pretty sure that if I decided not to go into work, my ass would be out the door. What kind of place do we live where workers can refuse to work and get rewarded for it? This isn’t the sweatshops of the 19th century…..we have it so good.

The growing disparages between the rich and the poor have been grossly inflated due to liberal economic policies that do not work. Subsidies, protectionism, and other forms of governmental intervention not only lead to an inefficient system as the writer specifies, but also points us towards a socialist society.

Mark needs to attend an economics course to see that the bloated wages and other problems that the unions have caused are a major issue in fiscal prosperity for all in the future. In the short run, this is going to hurt, badly. But long run success is what needs to be looked upon.

I believe that the U.S. automakers, while not perfect, have done a decent job with what they have in the bank. The Chevy VOLT is slated for 2010 release, and the plug-in hybrids and two-mode systems from Chrysler and GM are soon to be released. Ford has the ECOBOOST technology set to be produced within the next two years. But, Mark, while your unions are creating and supporting these discrepancies and giving the competition a head start, yes, you won’t be seeing anything innovative as there will be no funds to produce products from.

Mark,

So let me get this straight, U.S. Automakers are not making popular cars, and that’s why they are on the brink of bankruptcy? It has nothing to do with the astronomically high labor costs found in the US automobile industry?

Mark, as well as a multitude of other ill-informed liberals go through like with their head buried in the sand. I cannot believe this rash incompetence is so prevelant.

Josh,

Until you can prove otherwise, it is evident that the publishers of this newspaper believed that the author had a valid point, otherwise they would not have gone through publishing the piece. Additionally, the common knowledge of the individuals who are active in this post seems to be on track.

I believe that you should have facts to back up your claim of “regurgitating cliches” because as of this moment, it is apparent you are doing the same as those who believe they are more educated on a topic, but, at the same time, have no real arguments or legitimate points to bring up. Please try to avoid wasting our time in the future. Thanks.

-James.

Let’s face it, unions have been a complete disaster for the state of Michigan. I really don’t think anyone can defend them either. Just look at all the southern states taking jobs, people, and tax money away from the northern states.

Also, why would any new company want to come to Michigan? To start a business in a heavy-tax, union-sympathizing state? Even to liberals that sounds absurd.

Ted- A complete disaster? While the high wages and ample benefits paid to union workers appears to have caught up to Ford, GM et al., the high wages led to lots of consumer spending, house buying and put lots of money into the Michigan economy for decades.
As a liberal, it is hard to defend Unions at this point, but regardless of your political affiliation, its hard to defend the multi-million dollar bonsues given to Presidents and CEOs of failing corporations.
Chrysler recently bought out a bunch of employees and has announced a plan to higher a large new labor force at significantly lower, but still liveable, wages. It appears as if auto manufacturers are finally catching on.

Anyone taking a supply chain management curriculum should be required to take an employment law class and a labor history class before spouting off about things of which they know very little. Before unions negotiated these “luxuries” in contracts there was no health insurance, no pensions, no vacations, no holidays, no sick time, no job security, no seniority rights, no job tenure, no overtime pay, no equal pay for equal work, no jury duty pay, no break time, no health & safety provisions, and hundreds more that workers, both blue and white collar, believe have always been bestowed on workers by generous employers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is that as unions negotiated for these benefits other employers extended them to their workers both to retain help and to prevent unionization of their company.

It is a myth that the government provides and protects what unions once gained. Labor unions were instrumental in passing federal and state legislation that set minimum standards for health and safety, pay and hours. Those laws affect hundreds of thousands of workers that have never belonged to a union. Likewise labor unions were key to passing the civil rights laws, age and gender discrimination laws. But the burden to prove you have been abused by your employer is on you, the employee. You have no automatic right to a court hearing. Fear of reprisal, job loss and the huge expense of suing keep the vast majority of cases from ever being heard. There is no appeal to government when you have a grievance with your boss. There is no mediator to help you negotiate your individual contract. Without a union and a collective bargaining agreement you are an at will employee with absolutely no protection from arbitrary change to your working conditions and compensation. Quit you say, and find another job. Not so easy in this or any economy, even for supply chain management experts.

Reading comments on the State News always makes me realize that young people are inexperienced assholes who have no concept of how hard it really make it in the world.

Getting paid $30 dollars an hour to load screen doors onto a truck may be inefficient, but so is making millions a year to run companies into the ground. Without anyone looking out for the little guy, the disparity between the rich and the poor will start to look like in did in the dark ages — serfs, lords, and kings!

Mark,

Spare me the conspiracy theories about companies “conspiring to set lower wages”. What you call conspiracy, I call looking at a cost benefit analysis of a robot doing the job and watching the robot win by an order of 10.

You are totally missing the point. If absolutely anyone can walk in and do your job, you aren’t going to get paid alot for doing it. Its simple supply and demand. The solution is to get yourself some skills that ARE in demand, so you can command more money. Don’t like digging ditches? Well why don’t you learn to be a forman of ditch digger teams? Why don’t you learn a skilled trade? Why don’t you go back to school?

If businesses were to go around and pay too little for something, then they simply could not hire people and the job would not get done.

Its wikipedia, and anyone can enter whatever they want, so you know its accurate.

GPM:

Last time I checked, there is still an inkling of personal responsibility that must be placed on a laborer. It is not fair for a person to sacrifice five years in school to come out into the “real world” as you so call it, and not be able to obtain the $30.00 an hour wage that is mandated by some archaic policy. If a person is lazy or decides not to go to school, there should be some sacrifice towards the person who actually studies, does well, and graduates; that is, wages should be a lot higher than that of a common laborer. If there was no incentive to go to school, who would be able to run the companies that employ the grossly overpaid workers in these menial positions? Why do we have to continually protect the “little guy” if he doesn’t take his own initiative to better himself financially or invest in his education? Now, if an employer is gracious enough to offer such wages to an uneducated employee out of the “corporate social responsibility” theory, then I support that system. But when it is forced upon a company to pay these wages inefficiently against a global marketplace, then it is an unfair principle to enact. Why do you think companies that you believe are “big and evil” are forced to look elsewhere for labor? Why do you think outsourcing is such a big problem? It’s not because of an unfair economy, the economy is more than fair; it is due to the irresponsible fiscal packages that are given to menial laborers out of law and force. If we didn’t have such grossly inflated wages, then we wouldn’t have this problem.

To American Worker:

As aforesaid, thank you for your little history bite on the unions. I believe that the author is not against the unions in that they were not necessary in the 1930’s when labor practices were very unfair, but the fact is that they are not required today. You need to do some research before you actually make these bold claims about your knowledge on labor law and labor practices. The governmental agency of OSHA ensure safety in the workplace. The government has the department of labor which contains many subgroups such as EBSA, which protects benefits and pensions, ECAB which protects workers compensation packages. These agencies all interact with the companies that manufacture goods to ensure that the employees are not mistreated, and that they receive “fair” compensation for their input into the business. However, it is counterintuitive and inefficient to have the unions, on top of the government, working on preserving and enforcing the same ideals and agreements.

And, why do you think it is not so easy to find another job? Because of the bloated and unfair wages and benefits practices enacted under force and duress towards companies. These have led to the downfall of many economies, look at Pennsylvania’s steel and coal, the rust belt states, and here at home in Michigan. Not only that, but they have slowly thrust the rest of the nation into a recession. Thank you for being greedy in a time that others need to sacrifice. The ones who actually went to school, furthered themselves in education, and challenged themselves to be better than a menial laborer riveting bolts on an assembly line have all had to suffer because of this. They have taken pension cuts, seen benefits slashed, and salaries stalled in a monetarily inflating economy, while the blue collar workers have seen nothing but concessions that have resulted in no slashes in pensions or benefits, even though salaries have stayed nearly stagnant. Thank you for not motivating those who actually have the capacity to further themselves educationally to help lead us into the future.

The fact that a student has the theoretical and ideological capacity as a freshmen in college to write and publish an article such as this is quite astounding. It is true what he stated, and you are in a state of denial. Remember, the first stage of recovery is acceptance.

Hey Engineering Major, I believe that he was being a little bit metaphorical to get a point across. I’m currently an English student, and I can see clearly that he was being satirical to be somewhat effective in proving his point. If you’re going to be that analytical in your criticisms, you should really consider targeting something more “effective” to sound educated. Otherwise, you sound like a wisea** that nobody will listen to. I’m pretty sure you’re not very effective at proving your own points since you are an Engineering major. You can calculate wild and complicated problems and solve formulaic theorems, but you obviously lack the ability to communicate maturely and effectively.

Dear Econ Major:
If only the world were such a simple place and people treated each other fairly. My point is that the governmental protections, such as they are, are fragile. Most have only been around for a few years and could be repealed fairly easily. Every legislative session bills are introduced to roll back the reach of all the agencies you mentioned. Business would prefer to have those agencies eliminated. All the agencies have suffered budget cuts and staff reductions reducing their effectiveness. OSHA gets into most workplaces only once every seven years. That most employers treat employees better now than in the 1930s is not the result of their enlightened paternalism. Unions, law and court decisions have forced them to clean up their act. But it all started with unions and social reform groups. Without that voice, it is easy to predict backsliding in employer behavior.

You say that these agencies interact with business to make sure that the employees are not mistreated. In fact the whole system is reactive, responding to complaints, rather than being proactive. Employers do the minimum to reduce their liability when complaints are filed. The process to get justice in civil rights violations, sexual harassment suits, age or gender discrimination, or unlawful discharge can truly drag on for years. If you are in a union you have an advocate. If you are not covered by the NLRA you need a lawyer. You get the justice you can afford.

You seem to think that your education will protect you. People with four year degrees are the most commonly outsourced group of workers now. Doctors, who used to be independent business people, now find themselves mere employees of HMOs. These health care factories raise the doctor/patient ratio, reduce the time a doctor can spend with a patient, dictate the kinds of medications and treatments that can be dispensed. Guess what doctors are doing to gain some level of influence in their workplace. They are forming unions and negotiating for the conditions of their employment. Any worker that can be easily replaced, no matter their level of education or expertise, is at risk.

If you feel you are better positioned for success as your own advocate, go for it. But don’t begrudge the success of those who do it collectively. Indeed, negotiating solutions to problems is almost always better than “love it or leave it.” When you have roots in a community, financial commitments and family obligations it’s tough to shrug your shoulders, smile and say “oh well, that’s the free market.”

Yes, I think the guy making $40,000/year is definitely the problem.

Link Text